[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: `base' section.

'Manoj Srivastava wrote:'
>	I was not very clear, was I? What I meant was, I uploaded the
> base disks the day they were minted, and hence, after installing the
> base disks, I could ignore the base section while downloading using
> ftp (this is pre dpkg-ftp).  Of course, from that point onwards base
> became like any other section during upgrades.

I think there is (or should be) an order in upgrading.  base comes
first, libs second, then the rest.  Within base lsdo first, libc or
dpkg next, other libs, perl, the rest.  Perhaps dselect should know
about this order?

I just had to reinstall Debian on a system where dselect upgraded perl
before libc5, ldso, and company (this was an old system before perl
pre-depended on libc5, libdl1, etc - horrible bug that!).  Of course,
dpkg --force didn't even help (it probably would have solved the
problem eventually, but in my impatience (or maybe --force did it?) I
trashed ldso or init or both).

Anyone care to speculate on how many other "buzz" systems will get
hosed upon upgrade to rex/bo due to this long-standing (but finally
resolved!) perl bug?  I can't offer any solutions to these masses.
Anyone else know how to prevent these disasters.

Christopher J. Fearnley            |    Linux/Internet Consulting
cjf@netaxs.com, cjf@onit.net       |    UNIX SIG Leader at PACS
http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf         |    (Philadelphia Area Computer Society)
ftp://ftp.netaxs.com/people/cjf    |    Design Science Revolutionary
"Dare to be Naive" -- Bucky Fuller |    Explorer in Universe

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com

Reply to: